Discussion:
What happened to all the good flight sims?
(too old to reply)
Cheddar
2004-09-17 08:25:10 UTC
Permalink
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.

I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?

I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
Andrew
2004-09-17 09:06:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I have no idea, but I would imagine comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim
would be a better place to get an informed opinion.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Tim O
2004-09-17 10:35:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I have no idea, but I would imagine comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim
would be a better place to get an informed opinion.
That newsgroup is a train wreck with all the political threads, you
might be better off just going to a web forum.

Check out IL-2 Sturmovik. Real cool sim if you're into prop fighting,
and very well supported by the developers and community with add-ons.
http://www.il2sturmovik.com/

I'm hoping the lack of realistic flight combat games you noted is just
a market cycle, but with the way games seem to be getting dumbed down,
I'm afraid it's not. The best flight sims today are community
designed, like Full Canvas Jacket (WWI) based on Red Baron 2, and the
patched Falcon 4 for jet sims. Last time I messed with Falcon 4, doing
all the patches to get it up to date was a huge pain in the ass.
Perhaps it has been streamlined since.
Kevin
2004-09-17 12:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim O
Post by Andrew
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I have no idea, but I would imagine comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim
would be a better place to get an informed opinion.
That newsgroup is a train wreck with all the political threads, you
might be better off just going to a web forum.
Check out IL-2 Sturmovik. Real cool sim if you're into prop fighting,
and very well supported by the developers and community with add-ons.
http://www.il2sturmovik.com/
I'm hoping the lack of realistic flight combat games you noted is just
a market cycle, but with the way games seem to be getting dumbed down,
I'm afraid it's not. The best flight sims today are community
designed, like Full Canvas Jacket (WWI) based on Red Baron 2, and the
patched Falcon 4 for jet sims. Last time I messed with Falcon 4, doing
all the patches to get it up to date was a huge pain in the ass.
Perhaps it has been streamlined since.
Maddox games should be releasing Pacific Fighters sometime soon, which
uses an updated version of the IL2 engine based around, you guessed,
the pacific war. Also includes carrier landings.
DR
2004-09-17 10:24:41 UTC
Permalink
Janes was bought up and closed down, so that was the end of their line of
sims (ended with Janes F-18).
riku
2004-09-17 10:29:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
What's wrong with the old ones? It is not like they have much room to
improve anymore besides graphics.

There are some newer flight sims every now and then, ask for them in
the flight sim group. IL-2 seems to get new expansion packs every now
and then, and I also keep hearing about the FreeFalcon project. Some
time ago (several months ago? year ago?) some "Lock On" title was also
released, I don't know more about it.

Flight sims are not like action games which you play for just odd 10
hours and put away after that, you play a good flight sim for several
months or longer. Thus there is no need to constantly buy new flight
sims.
dlw
2004-09-17 12:12:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by riku
Flight sims are not like action games which you play for just odd 10
hours and put away after that, you play a good flight sim for several
months or longer. Thus there is no need to constantly buy new flight
sims.
How about years? I've just reinstalled EAW for the umpteenth time,
downloaded some new terrain and skins, having a blast with this old
classic all over again.
H. Jörg
2004-09-17 14:31:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by dlw
Post by riku
Flight sims are not like action games which you play for just odd 10
hours and put away after that, you play a good flight sim for several
months or longer. Thus there is no need to constantly buy new flight
sims.
How about years? I've just reinstalled EAW for the umpteenth time,
downloaded some new terrain and skins, having a blast with this old
classic all over again.
I recently reinstalled EAW too, because I liked the nice terrain in the
past. But after my first flight I uninstalled the game and returned to IL2 -
much better flight model and graphics ;-)
magnulus
2004-09-17 17:06:27 UTC
Permalink
They died from becomming too hardcore.

IL-2 is an impressive simulation, but as a game it will take months of
training (yes, training) to even become skilled to an "ace" level. I think
I've shot down a grand total of three planes, and I've probably logged 40
hours in the game total.

Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator series was seriously underrated by
hardcore fans, and it's never gotten its due.
Cheddar
2004-09-17 17:28:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by magnulus
They died from becomming too hardcore.
IL-2 is an impressive simulation, but as a game it will
take months
Post by magnulus
of training (yes, training) to even become skilled to an
"ace" level.
Post by magnulus
I think I've shot down a grand total of three planes, and
I've
Post by magnulus
probably logged 40 hours in the game total.
Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator series was seriously
underrated by
Post by magnulus
hardcore fans, and it's never gotten its due.
I remember games like F22 by the likes of DID. I think they
got the balance between realism and gameplay fun just right.

It's a real shame there arnt more like that. Personally I
prefer modern day combat flight sims as opposed to WWII
sims. I did play IL-2 but like you I found it incredibly
difficult.

Anyone remember F19-Stealth fighter from Microprose? I must
have read that huge manual at least ten times when I was
younger. I can still remember information about radar
signatures even now :-)
Toby Newman
2004-09-20 07:55:03 UTC
Permalink
# Cheddar
Post by Cheddar
I remember games like F22 by the likes of DID. I think they
got the balance between realism and gameplay fun just right.
It's a real shame there arnt more like that. Personally I
prefer modern day combat flight sims as opposed to WWII
sims.
I remember TFX on my 486 - that was a brilliant mix of challenge and
gameplay. I, too, much prefer to fly modern jets over propellor planes,
and TFX let you fly a Lockheed, a Eurofighter and even do runs in a
Stealth bomber.

And there was an ingame *.wav that said "I've got bogeys all over me!"
that always made me laugh :D
Post by Cheddar
Anyone remember F19-Stealth fighter from Microprose?
I couldn't afford it as a boy but I used to pore over the adverts in
magazines none the less!
--
Toby
Bateau
2004-09-26 12:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Toby Newman
# Cheddar
Post by Cheddar
I remember games like F22 by the likes of DID. I think they
got the balance between realism and gameplay fun just right.
It's a real shame there arnt more like that. Personally I
prefer modern day combat flight sims as opposed to WWII
sims.
I remember TFX on my 486 - that was a brilliant mix of challenge and
gameplay. I, too, much prefer to fly modern jets over propellor planes,
and TFX let you fly a Lockheed, a Eurofighter and even do runs in a
Stealth bomber.
I used to play Jet Fighter 2 which was too hard to dogfight in cause you
could never even see the enemies so I would just go and completely level
the city. I also played Chuck Yeager's Air Combat which was the best
flight sim ever. Red Baron 2 was fun with the Zeppelins and shit too. I
started playing it right after I read Eddie Rickenbacker's Fighting The
Flying Circus. It was just like the book.
Post by Toby Newman
And there was an ingame *.wav that said "I've got bogeys all over me!"
that always made me laugh :D
Post by Cheddar
Anyone remember F19-Stealth fighter from Microprose?
I couldn't afford it as a boy but I used to pore over the adverts in
magazines none the less!
J
2004-09-17 19:25:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
The latest modern flight sim to be released is Lock On Modern Aircombat
(LoMAC). I have it... but it's very choppy on my AMD 2800 with ATI 9800
Pro. So I've put it to the side after only spending a few hours with it.
Also, it's a very detailed sim. You'll need to send time learning the
radar, the weapons, ... I'm not sure if this sim supports carrier takeoffs.
http://www.lo-mac.com/features.php You could probably post in the pc
games flight sim newsgroup.

Have you played Janes FA-18? It's a couple of years old, but it supports
carrier takeoffs and landings. However, it's another sim where you'll need
to spend time learning the radar, and weapons, ...

For flight sims, there's not many left in the business. Probably the only
major developer left in the field is UbiSoft, the makers of the excellent
IL2 flight sim. They're currently working on a WWII Pacific version which
I believe will support carriers. http://www.pacific-fighters.com/teaser/
Predator
2004-09-18 00:36:18 UTC
Permalink
lock on modern air combat is the latest one. Steep system requirements tho
(like all other flight sims). It has f-15,a-10,su-27, su-33, mig29 flyable
out of the box. The su-33 can do carrier landings. This is not an arcade
sim.

Do you remember hornet 3.0? Well every year these guys add a few updates and
sell it as a new game. The latest I think is Operation Iraqi Freedom but
it's the same shit from 1998 plus some graphical update.

Then there's the usual abandoned sims from about 4 years ago (falcon4, usaf,
janes f-18 etc that many hardcore simmers still play)

Bottom line is flight sims aren't money makers and developers are spending
their resources on the flavor of the month type fps games that make them
more money.
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
Skeksis
2004-09-22 08:45:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Predator
Bottom line is flight sims aren't money makers and developers are
spending their resources on the flavor of the month type fps games
that make them more money.
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point where
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.

Don't get me wrong, I am a flight simmer myself although I prefer prop sims
over jet sims.

Skeksis
Stephen Robertson
2004-09-22 09:14:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point where
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.
The same sort of thing happened to the majority of space-sims. They ended up
being games you could only control with a decent joystick, and required
dozens of keys to activate the various systems.

Most of the people I know who play games occasionally on their PC don't have
a joystick at all, let alone a decent one. The most successful PC games
don't require any additional controllers, they just use mouse and keyboard.

-- Steve
Skeksis
2004-09-22 11:26:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Robertson
The same sort of thing happened to the majority of space-sims. They
ended up being games you could only control with a decent joystick,
and required dozens of keys to activate the various systems.
And then sometimes it seems you also need a degree in programming to really
get the joystick configuration software to max out the stick.
Post by Stephen Robertson
Most of the people I know who play games occasionally on their PC
don't have a joystick at all, let alone a decent one. The most
successful PC games don't require any additional controllers, they
just use mouse and keyboard.
Well to be honest I really get a kick out of using a full HOTAS but I
cannot tell you how many times I have had my butt kicked in Aces High by
people flying with basic sticks and/or the mouse. I guess that we are also
overlooking the dedication factor.

I would say in defense of the casual gamer that they just do not have the
time to try and become proficient, much less accomplished, in something as
demanding as a flight sim. I could be out and out rude and say in my usual
curmudgeonly fashion that most gamers now a days have not had enough
patience instilled in them to make the attempt. ;)

As for FPS, I have to confess that I use a mouse and Nostromo to play. ;)

Skeksis
riku
2004-09-22 11:32:35 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:14:37 +0100, "Stephen Robertson"
Post by Stephen Robertson
Most of the people I know who play games occasionally on their PC don't have
a joystick at all, let alone a decent one. The most successful PC games
don't require any additional controllers, they just use mouse and keyboard.
Well, since old flight sims and space sims were not playable with a
mouse either, I don't think that really proves they have become "too
complex".

I agree PC gamers don't buy flight sticks as often as they used to in
the old times. I think ever since Doom, most PC gamers started
demanding all their games should be playable with a mouse, and if a PC
gamer buys a game controller nowadays, it is never a joystick, but a
sorry gamepad which can be used only with console-type games. I think
it is a damn shame, but at least I own a MS Sidewinder Precision Pro 2
which I use with PC games that support joysticks.
Skeksis
2004-09-24 07:56:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by riku
Well, since old flight sims and space sims were not playable with a
mouse either, I don't think that really proves they have become "too
complex".
FS2004 is a prime example of complex. Even though I could play it with a
clone of an Atari stick if I wanted to, that still leaves all thebackground
tasks to be dealt with...flight planning, navigation, flight comms, air
traffic, etc.

I suspect that the current sims are the reasons why SWON was released, to
give the average gamer a flight game to enjoy.

Skeksis
Xocyll
2004-09-22 14:08:27 UTC
Permalink
"Stephen Robertson" <***@particle-systems.com> looked up from reading
the entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the
Post by Stephen Robertson
Post by Skeksis
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point
where
Post by Skeksis
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.
The same sort of thing happened to the majority of space-sims. They ended up
being games you could only control with a decent joystick, and required
dozens of keys to activate the various systems.
Most of the people I know who play games occasionally on their PC don't have
a joystick at all, let alone a decent one. The most successful PC games
don't require any additional controllers, they just use mouse and keyboard.
I used to do the joystick thing for flight/space/mech sims.

Then I ran into a couple small problems.
1. The digital joystick wouldn't work with older dos games like
Privateer.
2. after sitting unused for some time the joystick stopped working
properly.
3. I played Freelancer which was mouse control only.

When I bought X2 sometime later I used the mouse and it really wasn't a
problem at all since I no longer had the "need joystick" meme.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Skeksis
2004-09-24 08:01:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xocyll
I used to do the joystick thing for flight/space/mech sims.
Then I ran into a couple small problems.
1. The digital joystick wouldn't work with older dos games like
Privateer.
I just picked up the CH USB Fighterstick and USB Pro Throttle and am
starting to go down this 'wonderful' path of discovery, and it is not with
just the old games like Tachyon, I have run into it with Starshatter.
Hopefully I can put together a controller profile that will solve this
problem.
Post by Xocyll
2. after sitting unused for some time the joystick stopped working
properly.
I haven't run into this yet but then if the stick isn't working properly I
stop playing. ;)
Post by Xocyll
3. I played Freelancer which was mouse control only.
I think I will try a stick map before I go this far. ;)
Post by Xocyll
When I bought X2 sometime later I used the mouse and it really wasn't
a problem at all since I no longer had the "need joystick" meme.
Personally I like having the extra buttons and etc to play with. ;)

Skeksis
Xocyll
2004-09-24 12:44:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
Post by Xocyll
I used to do the joystick thing for flight/space/mech sims.
Then I ran into a couple small problems.
1. The digital joystick wouldn't work with older dos games like
Privateer.
I just picked up the CH USB Fighterstick and USB Pro Throttle and am
starting to go down this 'wonderful' path of discovery, and it is not with
just the old games like Tachyon, I have run into it with Starshatter.
Hopefully I can put together a controller profile that will solve this
problem.
Well games like Tachyon or Freespace 2 don't have that problem since
they're windows based games - a digital joystick works just fine with
them. Privateer and other Dos based games won't see a digital joystick
since it just doesn't exist outside windows.
Post by Skeksis
Post by Xocyll
2. after sitting unused for some time the joystick stopped working
properly.
I haven't run into this yet but then if the stick isn't working properly I
stop playing. ;)
I was rather pissed. Not like it got bashed about, it was just sitting
on top of the monitor (near the front where it's not hot) but parts of
it stopped working - the twist portion and the trigger.
The buttons, worked except the trigger, and everything else worked
except the twist (which isn't that great anyway).
Lack of the trigger was what killed it for actual use though.
Post by Skeksis
Post by Xocyll
3. I played Freelancer which was mouse control only.
I think I will try a stick map before I go this far. ;)
It's actually surprisingly playable.
You don't have a fixed target reticule in the center of the screen, it
moves all over the screen and all your guns have at least limited
swivel.
Best way to describe it is; You move the target reticule, the guns
follow it and unless you're in turret mode, so does the ship.
Post by Skeksis
Post by Xocyll
When I bought X2 sometime later I used the mouse and it really wasn't
a problem at all since I no longer had the "need joystick" meme.
Personally I like having the extra buttons and etc to play with. ;)
Well with a modern mouse, you get those. '
I've a 6 button mouse Logitech MX310.
That's more than enough for the basic stuff you really want instant
switching for.
Primary/secondary weapons firing - button 1 and 2.
Targeting next/prev - mousewheel up and down.
Weapons switching, afterburners etc buttons 3-6

There's a short period of adaptation, but the longer I go without a
joystick, the more "natural" using the mouse feels.
In some games like the mechwarrior series, the mouse is vastly superior
since it has finer gradiation, it gives almost pinpoint aiming
capability. No big deal up close, but its the difference between
missing and ripping the leg off an enemy mech at max range.
[First time I experienced this was in Mech3, a friend and I playing head
to head. He was using his joystick and while he could hit me up close,
at max range he would almost always miss. I was using a mouse at the
time for aiming, and it got to the point he thought I was cheating since
I was able to seriously damage or outright destroy him as soon as he got
in range.]


Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Skeksis
2004-09-29 10:30:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xocyll
Well games like Tachyon or Freespace 2 don't have that problem since
they're windows based games - a digital joystick works just fine with
them. Privateer and other Dos based games won't see a digital
joystick since it just doesn't exist outside windows.
I haven't tried Freespace 2 yet but Tachyon sees only one componant in
the HOTAS.
Post by Xocyll
I was rather pissed. Not like it got bashed about, it was just
sitting on top of the monitor (near the front where it's not hot) but
parts of it stopped working - the twist portion and the trigger.
The buttons, worked except the trigger, and everything else worked
except the twist (which isn't that great anyway).
Lack of the trigger was what killed it for actual use though.
Maybe heat loosened up the lubricant in the pots?
Post by Xocyll
There's a short period of adaptation, but the longer I go without a
joystick, the more "natural" using the mouse feels.
In some games like the mechwarrior series, the mouse is vastly
superior since it has finer gradiation, it gives almost pinpoint
aiming capability. No big deal up close, but its the difference
between missing and ripping the leg off an enemy mech at max range.
[First time I experienced this was in Mech3, a friend and I playing
head to head. He was using his joystick and while he could hit me up
close, at max range he would almost always miss. I was using a mouse
at the time for aiming, and it got to the point he thought I was
cheating since I was able to seriously damage or outright destroy him
as soon as he got in range.]
Hopefully I will be able to build a profile for the CH hardware that will
use the built in mouse/stick for fine aiming in MW3. If that fails
perhaps I can get Cam2Pan to fill in. :)

Skeksis
riku
2004-09-24 13:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xocyll
I used to do the joystick thing for flight/space/mech sims.
What is this "digital joystick" you talk about? If it was some
USB-thingie, of course it would not work with DOS games, as DOS
doesn't support USB ports. If it was Microsoft Sidewinder Pro, at
least for me it worked quite well with all DOS games in DOS mode,
including Privateer.

Was it some other kind of digital joystick that could not "emulate" CH
Flightstick Pro or similar in DOS? I was very happy with MS Sidewinder
Pro and it worked for me many many years, very durable. In fact it is
still fully functional, the only reason I bought USB MS Sidewinder
Precision Pro 2 for my new PC was because these old "game port"
joysticks didn't seem to work too well anymore in WinXP. At least I
couldn't get it to work. But it works fine on my old Win98/DOS
retro-PC.
Post by Xocyll
Then I ran into a couple small problems.
1. The digital joystick wouldn't work with older dos games like
Privateer.
2. after sitting unused for some time the joystick stopped working
properly.
3. I played Freelancer which was mouse control only.
When I bought X2 sometime later I used the mouse and it really wasn't a
problem at all since I no longer had the "need joystick" meme.
Xocyll
Xocyll
2004-09-25 12:23:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by riku
Post by Xocyll
I used to do the joystick thing for flight/space/mech sims.
What is this "digital joystick" you talk about? If it was some
USB-thingie, of course it would not work with DOS games, as DOS
doesn't support USB ports. If it was Microsoft Sidewinder Pro, at
least for me it worked quite well with all DOS games in DOS mode,
including Privateer.
It's not USB, it's a standard gameport connection.
[Well ok, it's both, it has a USB connector and an USB/Gameport adaptor.
I had it hooked up to a gameport since I didn't have USB enabled at the
time. Come to think of it, neither the board nor win95 really did USB.]

The original joysticks were analog, a purely mechanical methods of
measuring the movements.

The digital ones theoretically give better and finer control, but
without their drivers, they don't exist.

Kind of like a winmodem in a way - it's a limited hardware +software
package instead of a purely hardware one.

What I had that died was a Gravis Eliminator Precision Pro.
Post by riku
Was it some other kind of digital joystick that could not "emulate" CH
Flightstick Pro or similar in DOS? I was very happy with MS Sidewinder
Pro and it worked for me many many years, very durable. In fact it is
still fully functional, the only reason I bought USB MS Sidewinder
Precision Pro 2 for my new PC was because these old "game port"
joysticks didn't seem to work too well anymore in WinXP. At least I
couldn't get it to work. But it works fine on my old Win98/DOS
retro-PC.
The old CH Flightsticks were analog - they'd work on anything you could
hook them up to.

The Gravis could emulate all kinds of things...
Through it's software, which was windows only.

The best joysticks do both digital and analog, but none of those were
available here when I was looking for a joystick or were excessively
expensive. It's a peripheral that's only used in a few games - i'm not
going to pay over $200 for it.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
bp
2004-09-22 14:35:05 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:14:37 +0100, "Stephen Robertson"
Post by Stephen Robertson
The most successful PC games
don't require any additional controllers, they just use mouse and keyboard.
Well a successful flight sim requires a good Joystick.
B***@home.now
2004-09-22 15:33:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by riku
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:14:37 +0100, "Stephen Robertson"
Post by Stephen Robertson
The most successful PC games
don't require any additional controllers, they just use mouse and keyboard.
Well a successful flight sim requires a good Joystick.
I bought my first stick for Aces over the Pacific.
I haven't flight simmed in years but if they brought back AOP or Aces over
Europe with updated graphics I would buy them in an instant.
I still have the manuals.
I loved those games.

BEN
Skeksis
2004-09-24 08:02:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by bp
Well a successful flight sim requires a good Joystick.
I dunno. One thinkg I have learned over the years in Aces High is that an
expensive joystick is meaningless if the pilot doesn't have the skill or
the knowledge to go with it.

Skeksis
chainbreaker
2004-09-22 10:51:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that
too many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the
point where the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in
sims at all. It probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that
they all but require top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use
well.
They became too damn complex for even me to want to fool with, and I was
about as "hardcore" as a flight simmer could get.

They were probably 90% of my PC gaming for almost 15 years, but a little
over three years ago I walked away and haven't touched one since.
--
chainbreaker-and I even had *all* that expensive controller hardware

If you need to email, then chainbreaker (naturally) at comcast dot
net--that's "net" not "com"--should do it.
Skeksis
2004-09-22 12:06:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by chainbreaker
They became too damn complex for even me to want to fool with, and I was
about as "hardcore" as a flight simmer could get.
It seems as soon as Falcon 4 hit the shelves the sims started to get more
and more complex.
Post by chainbreaker
They were probably 90% of my PC gaming for almost 15 years, but a little
over three years ago I walked away and haven't touched one since.
The most fun I had flying was in Fighter Duel, now it seems that one must
be a real world pilot to really play sims any more. I suppose if I had tak
en all of the money I have put into my computers and software I could have
a private pilots license by now. ;)

Skeksis
chainbreaker
2004-09-22 13:26:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
The most fun I had flying was in Fighter Duel, now it seems that one
must be a real world pilot to really play sims any more. I suppose
if I had tak en all of the money I have put into my computers and
software I could have a private pilots license by now. ;)
Skeksis
Falcon 3.0 and EAW were the last ones I really enjoyed, and I enjoyed Falcon
3.0 *despite* it being buggy as hell.

Come to think of it, buggy releases probably were as much responsible for
the genre's demise as their increasing complexity.

I don't remember buying much of anything the last couple of years or so I
still played sims that didn't choke and die frequently and with gusto.

There's nothing quite as much fun as just about finishing a tough two hour
mission and then having a hard freeze before getting it credited.
--
chainbreaker

If you need to email, then chainbreaker (naturally) at comcast dot
net--that's "net" not "com"--should do it.
Stephen Robertson
2004-09-22 15:46:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
The most fun I had flying was in Fighter Duel, now it seems that one must
be a real world pilot to really play sims any more. I suppose if I had tak
en all of the money I have put into my computers and software I could have
a private pilots license by now. ;)
Skeksis
I used to work for Philips Media, publisher of Fighter Duel, and knew the
guys who produced Fighter Duel pretty well. It's a pity they went under,
right when they were developing Fighter Duel 2. I still have a couple of
Fighter Duel T-Shirts and a Fighter Duel Jacket.

The only time I do any 'flying' on a PC these days is playing Battlefield
1942. The flight model is a nice - not very realistic, but you still can
stall the planes, and have to worry about conserving speed and height. I use
a joystick to fly them, which seems to give me an advantage over the other
players who use a mouse. I really enjoy the game because the flying is
really seat-of-your-pants and you're not watching instruments all the time.
Your skill in flying, shooting and bombing really makes all the difference,
and of course you're flying against real people, both on the ground and in
the air. It's so satisfying to take out a moving tank with a well-aimed
bomb, or fly along at four feet above the ground to take out the runway
campers. <grin>

So there are games out there where the flying is fun, not too realistic, but
not so arcadey that it feels fake.

-- Steve
riku
2004-09-22 12:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by chainbreaker
They became too damn complex for even me to want to fool with, and I was
about as "hardcore" as a flight simmer could get.
They were probably 90% of my PC gaming for almost 15 years, but a little
over three years ago I walked away and haven't touched one since.
Hmmm, I don't really find current flight sims more complex than e.g.
Falcon 3.0 or many earlier MS Flight Simulators.

I think the major reason is that nowadays average gamers expect
simpler games than average gamers of early 90s.
riku
2004-09-22 11:29:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
Post by Predator
Bottom line is flight sims aren't money makers and developers are
spending their resources on the flavor of the month type fps games
that make them more money.
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point where
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.
I think jet sims have always been pretty complex for average gamers.
Starting from the PC CGA/EGA or Amiga versions of F-16 Falcon,
Microprose's most flight combat sims etc. I also think that Secret
Weapons of Luftwaffe had quite a steep learning curve, so steep that I
never properly started playing it. Not so much the flying itself, but
the starting menus etc. Falcon 3.0 was also quite hard to start
playing. Prop sims are usually easier to learn, even today.

And lets not forget the original MS Flight Simulators series. They
always had quite a steep learning curve, didn't they? Yet they always
were best sellers.

I don't think the situation is really that different with flight sims
that it used to be in early 90s. There are hardcore sims today that
average gamers shun, but so there were in early 90s. Likewise there
were easier "action sims" like the Jet Fighter series and Comanche
games, but similar games also exist today for the average gamers.

So I have to ask: what is it exactly that people are complaining
about? ;-) If anything, the reason why proper sims are not selling
well anymore is because average gamers today are dumber than the
average gamers of the early 90s. If they released a game with similar
micro-management and tactical thinking as X-Com, it would sell poorly
today, especially on consoles. Gamers today mostly want nice graphics
(lots of FMV), simple gameplay and a game soundtrack made by current
pop "artists", that's all.
Stoneskin
2004-09-22 13:44:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point where
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.
Don't get me wrong, I am a flight simmer myself although I prefer prop sims
over jet sims.
IMO it's probably because the average gamer prefers a quick fix game
over one which reading the manual and learning a hundred controls
requires.

Kids, eh?
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]
J
2004-09-22 17:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
Post by Predator
Bottom line is flight sims aren't money makers and developers are
spending their resources on the flavor of the month type fps games
that make them more money.
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point where
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.
Don't get me wrong, I am a flight simmer myself although I prefer prop sims
over jet sims.
Skeksis
I started out playing F15 Strike Eagle on an Atari 8 bit computer. Enjoyed
Battle Hawks, Battle of Britian, Aces over the Pacific... and even played
Falcon 3.0. But most of these games were easy to jump into. As flight
sims were able to advance with faster computers and more memory, the
learning curve for the user also grew. The learning curve for jumping into
a first person shooter is maybe 2 mins?

I remember playing Enemy Engaged Commanche vs Hokum (helocopter sim). I'd
read the manual. Started a campaign. Studied the mission map. Took off
and promptly got shot down. Restarted. Studied the mission map. Took
off and got shot down again. I gave up after a few hours. It wasn't until
about a year later that I reinstalled it cause I was seen so many postings
about how great it was. I forced myself to figure out what I was doing
wrong. I did. My tactics were bad. I was going in fast and low. When
I should have been high and slow with my radar set to Sam Threats. Now I
was engaging the SAMs from afar and running for cover when they fired upon
me. The game was a blast.

The same thing happened with Janes USAF. I had to study what sort of
tactics worked and didn't in the sim.

A lot of sims out there cover stuff like how to adjust your radar, how to
deploy your weapons, how to navigate, ... but then when you actually fire up
the game, you're lost as to how to win at it. Some have training missions,
but the only sim that I've seen do this well was Janes USAF. Most sims
will simply throw you into a training bombing run and tell you to hit X key
to release your bombs.

I still have my Falcon 4.0 binder setting ontop of my computer desk waiting
for me to install it for the 4th time. Each time that I've installed it,
I've given up after a few missions and went and played Quake2/UT/Max Payne.
To tell you the turth, I sort of dread the thought of having to read thru
the manual. And then try to figure out what tactics I need to know that
were left out of it. Reminds me of the time when the A-10s were deployed to
Gulf War. The A-10 pilots wanted to fly high enough so that ground forces
couldn't hear them (therefore no shoulder launched SAMS). But this wasn't
in any of their manuals. The solution was for them to have the plane fly
overhead at different altitudes until they couldn't hear them anymore.

Bottom line: while a lot of us might want to jump into a Warthog and blast
bad guys into the stone age, not many of us are going to spend the time
learning how to do it.
d***@eskom.co.za
2004-09-23 05:28:50 UTC
Permalink
IL2 and all it's derivitives (Aces/Pacific Fighters), combined with
exceptional release quality and highly variable difficulty settings (you can
play Counterstrike in the sky if you want to), is bringing a lot of people
back to the genre.

It also seems to have inspired a fair number of new flying games/sims being
released, there are several on the shelves again, like the old days.

As for a joystick, I play all my racing games with it as well. It's far more
accurate and controlable than a wheel (gave my MSFF wheel away).
Post by J
Post by Skeksis
Post by Predator
Bottom line is flight sims aren't money makers and developers are
spending their resources on the flavor of the month type fps games
that make them more money.
I wonder if the reason that flight sims are not money makers is that too
many of us simmers kept demanding more and more realism, to the point
where
Post by Skeksis
the average gamer was unable to find any enjoyment in sims at all. It
probably doesn't help that sims are so complex that they all but require
top of the line; i.e.expensive, sticks to use well.
Don't get me wrong, I am a flight simmer myself although I prefer prop
sims
Post by Skeksis
over jet sims.
Skeksis
I started out playing F15 Strike Eagle on an Atari 8 bit computer.
Enjoyed
Post by J
Battle Hawks, Battle of Britian, Aces over the Pacific... and even played
Falcon 3.0. But most of these games were easy to jump into. As flight
sims were able to advance with faster computers and more memory, the
learning curve for the user also grew. The learning curve for jumping into
a first person shooter is maybe 2 mins?
I remember playing Enemy Engaged Commanche vs Hokum (helocopter sim).
I'd
Post by J
read the manual. Started a campaign. Studied the mission map. Took off
and promptly got shot down. Restarted. Studied the mission map. Took
off and got shot down again. I gave up after a few hours. It wasn't until
about a year later that I reinstalled it cause I was seen so many postings
about how great it was. I forced myself to figure out what I was doing
wrong. I did. My tactics were bad. I was going in fast and low.
When
Post by J
I should have been high and slow with my radar set to Sam Threats. Now I
was engaging the SAMs from afar and running for cover when they fired upon
me. The game was a blast.
The same thing happened with Janes USAF. I had to study what sort of
tactics worked and didn't in the sim.
A lot of sims out there cover stuff like how to adjust your radar, how to
deploy your weapons, how to navigate, ... but then when you actually fire up
the game, you're lost as to how to win at it. Some have training missions,
but the only sim that I've seen do this well was Janes USAF. Most sims
will simply throw you into a training bombing run and tell you to hit X key
to release your bombs.
I still have my Falcon 4.0 binder setting ontop of my computer desk waiting
for me to install it for the 4th time. Each time that I've installed it,
I've given up after a few missions and went and played Quake2/UT/Max Payne.
To tell you the turth, I sort of dread the thought of having to read thru
the manual. And then try to figure out what tactics I need to know that
were left out of it. Reminds me of the time when the A-10s were deployed to
Gulf War. The A-10 pilots wanted to fly high enough so that ground forces
couldn't hear them (therefore no shoulder launched SAMS). But this wasn't
in any of their manuals. The solution was for them to have the plane fly
overhead at different altitudes until they couldn't hear them anymore.
Bottom line: while a lot of us might want to jump into a Warthog and blast
bad guys into the stone age, not many of us are going to spend the time
learning how to do it.
mr bernard langham
2004-09-18 07:03:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
Lock On: Modern Air Combat
IL2-Sturmovik

To c.s.i.p.g.flightsim with you.
J
2004-09-18 21:10:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by mr bernard langham
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
Lock On: Modern Air Combat
IL2-Sturmovik
To c.s.i.p.g.flightsim with you.
IL2 Sturmovik has carrier landings?
Brian B.,
2004-09-23 11:35:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by J
IL2 Sturmovik has carrier landings?
Not that I've ever seen.
d***@eskom.co.za
2004-09-23 12:36:15 UTC
Permalink
The next variation, Pacific Fighters due in a couple of months, will have
carriers. There will be 2 options, a stand alone install or, for those who
have IL2-FB-Aces, a merged install.
Post by Brian B.,
Post by J
IL2 Sturmovik has carrier landings?
Not that I've ever seen.
PKH
2004-09-18 11:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
I think it is because sim's needed/wanted to be more and more complex and
realistic, which drove up development time and cost, while reducing the
mass-market appeal (bad combination). What I think the genre needs, are some
titles that are accessible to newcomers, and focuses more on fun and
entertainment than just hard-core realism (like f.ex.the realism-light, but
fun AH-64 Air Assault game).

PKH
Skeksis
2004-09-22 08:48:30 UTC
Permalink
What I think the genre needs, are some titles that are accessible to
newcomers, and focuses more on fun and entertainment than just hard-core
realism (like f.ex.the realism-light, but fun AH-64 Air Assault game).
Sounds like it's time for another Crimson Skies. Too bad the last
iteration was XBox only.

Skeksis
riku
2004-09-22 11:34:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Skeksis
What I think the genre needs, are some titles that are accessible to
newcomers, and focuses more on fun and entertainment than just hard-core
realism (like f.ex.the realism-light, but fun AH-64 Air Assault game).
Sounds like it's time for another Crimson Skies. Too bad the last
iteration was XBox only.
Aren't there several action flight games also for PC already? The
problem with them is that they are so shallow in gameplay and too
similar to each others.
Mike Kirkland
2004-09-19 02:23:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
http://www.simhq.com/_air2/air_035a.html

Should be out next month and has carrier ops.
Cheddar
2004-09-20 12:37:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Kirkland
Post by Cheddar
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
http://www.simhq.com/_air2/air_035a.html
Should be out next month and has carrier ops.
Looks good, i'll keep a eye out for it.

Thanks.
Sam
2004-10-03 10:18:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheddar
With everyone seemingly being obsessed with graphics, why
hasnt anyone made a decent flight sim recently.
I remember the likes of Falcon/F22 being great games. I know
DID went out of business but what happened to all the
others?
I'd love to see a brand new military flight sim featuring
with aircraft carrier landings etc.
Well After G2 Interactive cancelled the Newest Game that was supposed
to be Falcon 4 Gold:OIR I was pretty much shocked. Falcon 4 was great
but very buggy.
Flight sims are risky and if anyone knows of one like Falcon 4.0 that
is out now please let me know too.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...